Random Assignment in Criminal Justice Research Some Ethical and Legal Issues
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9680359 |
|---|---|
| Authors | PHYLLIS JO BAUNACH (National Institute of Justice, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1980 |
| Volume | 17 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 435-444 |
| Publication date | 1980-02-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Criminology (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0011-1384 • E-ISSN: 1745-9125 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1745-9125.1980.tb01307.x |
| OpenAlex | W2094598488 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 7 |
| References cited | 3 |
Randomization techniques entail sound methodological means to assign participants to groups for experimental purposes. However, prior to applying this technique to criminal justice research, several ethical and legal issues must be considered. For example, in a legal context, the objectivity afforded by the randomization process may be interpreted as “arbitrary.” Similarly, depriving control group participants of the presumed benefits of a newly launched program may be regarded as unethical. It may be possible to adapt the randomization procedure to experimental contingencies. However, caution must then be taken in carrying out the adaptation, as the methodological rigor and hence the interpretability of the results may be affected
Context (archaeology · Criminal justice · Criminal procedure · Criminology · Economic Justice · Epistemology · Interpretability · Objectivity (philosophy · Political science · Randomization · Randomized controlled trial · Artificial Intelligence · Computer Science · Law · Medicine · Psychology · Social and Intergroup Psychology · Social Psychology
| Unique citing works | 7 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,16 |
| Citation span | 1981 - 2022 (42) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 7 |